Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-24T06:32:44.234Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Thomas More, Grammarian and Orator

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

William Nelson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Despite the intensive study of Thomas More during the last decade, a study stimulated by his canonization, by the fourth centenary of his martyrdom, and by the enthusiastic and scholarly work of A. W. Reed, R. W. Chambers, and other writers, there remain significant aspects of his life that have received comparatively little attention. In a stimulating paper published eight years ago, Marie Delcourt demonstrated that the “English” tradition of More biography, the tradition created by More's kinsfolk and devoted followers, represented a conscious attempt to emphasize his saintly qualities and those of his works which supported his claim to canonization. For this reason, these biographers gave little weight to More's humanist activities, his secular Latin writings, and his association with Erasmus, a dubious character from the point of view of the Counter-reformation. Aside from questions of bias, moreover, the period about which the “English” biographical tradition is least informative is that during which More was most interested in the humanities, since Roper, the primary source of the school of hagiographers, became More's son-in-law only after More had left academic study for the business of the royal court. The distortion created either by the ignorance or by the prejudice of More's early biographers, says Delcourt, has been repaired only partly by modern scholarship, and Chambers' account of Thomas More, though by far the best of recent studies, is nevertheless of the pattern laid down by Rastell, Roper, Harpsfield, and their followers. In the following pages, therefore, I have set down a few bits of information, some little known, others quite overlooked, which, in connection with the established circumstances of More's life, serve to emphasize the typically humanist character of his early career.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 58 , Issue 2 , June 1943 , pp. 337 - 352
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1943

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 A brief review of the material presented in this paper was read before the Renaissance Group of the Modern Language Association at its meeting in Boston, December, 1940.

2 “Recherches sur Thomas More,” Humanisme et Renaissance (1936), pp. 22–42.

3 The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy, translated by S. G. C. Middlemore (New York, 1935), p. 236.

4 See my John Skelton, Laureate (Columbia University Press, 1939), pp. 29–31.

5 R. W. Chambers, Thomas More (New York, 1936), pp. 56–66.

6 Translated, ibid., p. 81, from MS Arundel 249, fol. 85.

7 Harpsfield's Life of More, EETS, Or. Ser. 186 (1932), p. 13.

8 Progymnasmata, published with More's Epigrammata (Basle, 1518). Though not published until 1518, the work was certainly completed much earlier. See Chambers, More, p. 89.

9 Luciani opuscula (Paris, 1506).

10 A man kills a tyrant's son, and the tyrant thereupon kills himself. Is the assassin entitled to the money which, in this hypothetical republic, is legally the reward of tyrannicides? Lucian argues the affirmative; More and Erasmus maintain the negative. See C. R. Thompson, The Translations of Lucian by Erasmus and St. Thomas More (Ithaca, N. Y., 1940), pp. 29–44.

11 The Latin of this dedication is quoted by Thompson, op. cit., p. 40.

12 Stapleton, Vila Thomae Mori, translated by P. E. Hallett (London 1928), p. 9.

13 Register of the University of Oxford, edited by C. W. Boase (Oxford, 1885), vol. i, p. 299 (Smyth, More).

14 Oxford University Press, 1934.

15 W. D. Macray, A Register of the Members of St. Mary Magdalen, i, 120.

16 MS Magdalen College, No. 168, fol. 36.

17 R. S. Stanier, Magdalen School (Oxford, 1940), pp. 36, 57, 59.

18 Anthony à Wood, Athenae Oxonienses (1813), i, Col. 15. The three extant editions (see below, n. 21) are all of later date, but the dedication of the book to Morton, who died in 1500, makes Wood's statement altogether probable.

19 Letters and Papers of Henry VIII, i (edition of 1920), No. 132, grant No. 87. See also Cambridge, Grace Book, Beta i, p. 230.

20 Bale, Scriptorum Catalogus (Basle, 1559 [?]), Cent, undec. no. 89, says that Holt “claruit anno Domini 1510.” According to the Index Library, vol. 50, the will of one John Holt of Whitfield is recorded in the Probate Registry, Canterbury (Consistory Register, vol. 11, fol. 8) under the year 1511. Because of the war, I have been unable to secure a copy of this will.

21 The text here given is that of Wynken de Worde (c. 1510). Variants are cited from the edition of Pynson (c. 1520) and from the fragment of an edition by A. Van Berghen preserved in Cambridge Library Fragments Syn 6.50.1–3. For the checking of the references to the Pynson edition, I am indebted to Dr. H. L. R. Edwards, of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. My references to the Van Berghen fragment depend upon the micro-film reproduction made by University Microfilms (Order no. 1315). The Pynson and Van Berghen texts are cited as P and B respectively.

Thome more / diserti adolescentuli in
lucubraciunculas Holtiade. Epigramma.
Quem legis Holtiade tenerum pia iurta libellum
Seu vir seu puer es / lac puerile voca
Dulce / sed et meritum liber hic me iudice nomen
Lactea qui pueris dogmata prestai / habet
Vos angli legite hec iuuenes / in maxima quorum
Exiguum quamuis commoda surgit opus
Que vos in minimum legitis digesta libellum
Precepta in paucos pauca legenda dies
Holtiades eadem vigili quesita labore
Legit ab innumeris pauca voluminibus
Sedulis ille vagis sese circumtulit agrïs.
Mellifice officio quam bene functus apis
Quicquid ibi in dulces sapidi congessit aceruos
Mellis in hunc paruum retulit alueolum Hoc opus anglorum cupienti [P, cupieti] intrare iuuente
Prima sit in reliquam ianua grammaticam
Hanc tarnen ante forem docti struxere / sed horum
Quisque suos latio [P, latino] / fecerat ore modos
Quid bene fulta penus prodest tibi / quando retentat.
Janua magníficos irreseranda cibos
Angle puer latio quid ages sermone / sapisse
Non potes in primo verba latina die
Te decet altricis tenerum recubare sub alis
Discereque ex verbis non tua verba tuis
Structa / sed et verbis iam pridem ianua nostris
Grammatice / verum si fateamur erat /
Illa tarnen vetus et tunsu lacerata frequenti
Que xix [P, vix] assiduo pulsa labore crepat
Janua nostra noua est / tenereque facillima turbe
Ad digiti minimum quamcito aperta sonum
(Sig A1v–A2r)
Thome more epygramma
Macte puer gaude lepido quicumque libello
Delicus [B, Delicijs] tuis pastus es holtiade
Nec tibi dat carnes nec acerbos arbuta fructus
Dat tibi que dulci pocula lacte fluunt
Carnis in inualida massa'grauis incubat aluo
Arbuta non sapide sunt leuis humor aque.
At lac & infantem sine pondere nutrit alumnum.
Lactis & infanti dulcis in ore sapor.
Pastus es hoc igitur / visum est decuisse nequibat
Grandia tam tenerum pondera ferre iecur
Nunc vbi desieris lactare / alimenta monemus
Non mellita nimis fortia sume magis.
Ergo aut Sulpitii placida lepidissime mensa
Utilibus Phoce vel satur esto cibis [P, cibus]
Aut Sepontini bibito noua musta Perotti
Aut diomedeis condita mulsa cadis
Aut alium quemcumque velis imitarier opta /
Dulcia qui caute misceat vtilibus
Precipue sed Sulpicii documenta capesses [P, capisses]
Holti consiliis vse vel vse meis.
Discenda holtiades heteroclita liquit ab illo
Et quodcunque tenent nomina queque genus.
Recta leges illic que sit constructio / sed post
Preterita & verbis iuncta supina suis.
Sedulus & tandem longe [B, longa] pulcherrima disces
Carmina limitibus continuisse suis.
Ergo musarum choreas ingressa iuuentus
Quum per Sulpitium plectra lyramque geres.
Dic mode / ferre lyram quum dextra nequiuerat. holtus [P, hultus]
Admonuit labris vbera chara meis.
(last leaf, recto)

22 It is noteworthy that every one on More's list of recommended grammarians: Sulpitius, Phocas, Perottus, and Diomedes, appears also on a similar list prepared by that most prolific grammar master of the Magdalen School, Robert Whittinton (The Vulgaria of John Stanbridge and the Vulgaria of Robert Whittinton, edited by Beatrice White, EETS, Or. Ser. 187 [1932], p. 34). This fact, read together with More's early friendship with such Magdalen scholars as Holt, Lily, and Grocyn, suggests that whatever his formal Oxford residence, More may have studied at the Magdalen Grammar School, one of the earliest and most influential centers of humanism at the English universities. The supposition is rendered more likely by the fact that, by direction of its founder, instruction at the Magdalen School was free to all who sought it (R. S. Stanier, Magdalen School [Oxford, 1940], pp. 19–20). If More were a member of Canterbury Hall or St. Mary's Hall, therefore, he would have been permitted to attend Magdalen lectures.

23 MS Arundel 249, fol. 85V. The letter has been printed but once, as far as I know, and rather inaccurately in Anglia, xiv (1891–92), 498–499.

24 I am now engaged in a study of the contents of MS Arundel 249. A reproduction of the manuscript in microfilm has been made by the Modern Language Association, Reproductions of Manuscripts and Rare Printed Books, No. 546F.

25 Register of the University of Oxford, edited by C. W. Boase (Oxford, 1885), i, 298 (Watson).

26 University Archives, Register G, fol. 183: “Eodem die [June 13, 1513] supplicat [a letter, perhaps a ”d“ for ”dominus,“ has been lined through by the scribe] thomas more quatenus Studium quod habuit 14 annis informando scolares grammaticam possit sibi sufficere vt admittatur ad informandum in grammatica hec est concessa sic quod legat unum librum salustij et componat ephegramma apponendum vallibus ecclesie beate marie virginis.” A photostat of this document is in my possession.

27 Stapleton, Vita Thomae Mori, translated by P. E. Hallett (London, 1928), p. 9.

28 Ibid., p. 15.

29 Ibid., pp. 103–104.

30 Thomae Mori Omnia Latina Opera (Louvain, 1566), p. 44.

31 T. E. Bridgett, The Life and Writings of Sir Thomas More (1891), pp. 172–176.

32 MS. Cotton Titus D iv.

33 Allen, Opus epistolarum Erasmi, ii, No. 389.

34 Acts of Court of the Mercers' Company, edited by L. Lyell and F. D. Watney (Cambridge, 1936). My attention was first drawn to these records by Professor C. J. Sisson. They are mentioned in a brief and unindexed “additional note” in Chambers' More, p. 405. Chambers says, “The matter needs, and is receiving, further attention.” As far as I know, however, no discussion of it has yet appeared in print.

35 Acts of Court, p. 320. Chambers, depending upon Watney, Hospital of St. Thomas of Aeon (1906), gives the date as March 21, 1508. Acts of Court makes it clear that the “1508” is old style.

36 Ibid., p. xiii.

37 A “pensionary” of Bruges was the humanist Francis of Cranevelt who became a friend of More and carried on a lengthy correspondence with him (see Literat ad Franciscum Craneveldium, edited by Henry de Vocht [Louvain, 1928]).

38 Although in theory the Adventurers were composed of all the guilds which sent their products into foreign trade, in practice it was almost always a mercer that presided over the Adventurers, and the records and accounts of the exporters were kept by the Mercers' clerk and preserved in the Mercers' books.

39 Acts of Court, pp. 329–345. In the Journal of the Common Council of the City of London (Guildhall Record Office, Journal 11, fol. 181v), under the date March 23, 1513, one Thomas More, mercer, is said to be “defunct.” This entry has been alleged against the identification of the Thomas More, Mercer, who was elected burgess in Parliament in January, 1509, with the great St. Thomas (Chambers, More, p. 405). It might, with equal strength, be referred to the More who was involved in the conversations with Antwerp. But on March 5, 1518, five years after the death of “Thomas More, mercer,” the Master of St. Thomas of Aeon brought before the court of Mercers the books of ordinances and statutes proposed for a new foundation “whiche quayres before alle the said parsones were redd in Inglysshe, and uppon euery article theryn conteyned amonge theym they had Communycacion, and agreed that the said quayre shulde be shewed unto Maister Thomas More and to have his advise and Counseyll theryn …” (Acts of Court, pp. 452–453). I do not think it can be doubted that the Master More who was called upon to advise the Mercers in 1518 was the man who aided the company during the negotiations of 1509.

40 No one has as yet been able to track down the case in court records.

41 The Life of Sir Thomas Moore, edited by E. V. Hitchcock (Early English Text Society, Original Series 197 [1935]), p. 10.

42 Chambers, More, p. 405. See above, Note 39.

43 Allen, Opus epistolarum, ii, No. 461.

44 Bridgett, op. cit., p. 177.

45 Ibid., pp. 177–178.

46 Roper, The Life of Sir Thomas Moore, EETS, Or. Ser. 197, p. 22.

47 Chambers, More, p. 193.

48 Chambers, p. 255.

49 Op. cit., p. 178.

50 Allen, op. cit., iii, No. 832.

51 Abridged from Erasmus' letter by Bridgett, op. cit., p. 167. See Allen, Opus epistolarum, iii, No. 855.

52 Humanist atrabiliousness may be detected in More's epigrams on Brixius and in his anti-Lutheran tracts. But in neither case was More fighting a personal battle. Brixius had attacked England, and the Lutherans had declared war on true religion.